Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It's getting to the point where Stabbings are no longer News-worthy.


People are no longer shocked by such news.


The Government knows that while the people are fighting each other, they are not fighting the Government.

This makes the people divided and weak.. and that suits all Governments.


It's all very very sad.


DulwichFox

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's getting to the point where Stabbings are no

> longer News-worthy.

>

> People are no longer shocked by such news.

>

> The Government knows that while the people are

> fighting each other, they are not fighting the

> Government.

> This makes the people divided and weak.. and

> that suits all Governments.

>

> It's all very very sad.

>

> DulwichFox


No argument with your first point but do you really mean the second part - that the Government is in some way allowing or wanting people to kill each other over trifles?

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's getting to the point where Stabbings are

> no

> > longer News-worthy.

> >

> > People are no longer shocked by such news.

> >

> > The Government knows that while the people

> are

> > fighting each other, they are not fighting the

> > Government.

> > This makes the people divided and weak.. and

> > that suits all Governments.

> >

> > It's all very very sad.

> >

> > DulwichFox

>

> No argument with your first point but do you

> really mean the second part - that the Government

> is in some way allowing or wanting people to kill

> each other over trifles?


I reckon it comes down to language, Fox didn't say they want it, but it can suit them - just as George W. doubtless didn't "want" 9/11 (unless you believe the tinfoil hat merchants) but it did suit his agenda of massively boosting defence spending and taking revenge for daddy's defeat in Iraq.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Frankly I'm not sure Theresa May gives much

> thought to people at all. I think she's more a

> policies and process person.


And what, pray. do you expect her to do?


There was a shooting in Deptford as well

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6424923/london-shooting-man-machine-gun-brent-stabbing-deptford/

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Frankly I'm not sure Theresa May gives much

> > thought to people at all. I think she's more a

> > policies and process person.

>

> And what, pray. do you expect her to do?


Reinstating the ?600m of cuts she's imposed on the Met as Home Secretary and PM might be a good start.

violent crime cannot be totally removed but it can be controlled, most often by cash funding. unfortunately , this is an exponetial costing problem - the fat tails are the hardest and most costly to cover, so tolerance risk models are used to determine the best confidence scenario & provide some kind of acceptable balance. These fat tails take the form of dead young men these days. the accceptable output of a risk model that has accepted a certain level of fatality as part of the cost cutting. the UKG has accepted this level of slaughter as part of its never ending austerity programme. these dead young men are the direct result of cold number crunching.

flocker spotter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> violent crime cannot be totally removed but it can

> be controlled, most often by cash funding.

> unfortunately , this is an exponetial costing

> problem - the fat tails are the hardest and most

> costly to cover, so tolerance risk models are used

> to determine the best confidence scenario &

> provide some kind of acceptable balance. These fat

> tails take the form of dead young men these days.

> the accceptable output of a risk model that has

> accepted a certain level of fatality as part of

> the cost cutting. the UKG has accepted this level

> of slaughter as part of its never ending austerity

> programme. these dead young men are the direct

> result of cold number crunching.


Truth.

flocker spotter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> violent crime cannot be totally removed but it can

> be controlled, most often by cash funding.

> unfortunately , this is an exponetial costing

> problem - the fat tails are the hardest and most

> costly to cover, so tolerance risk models are used

> to determine the best confidence scenario &

> provide some kind of acceptable balance. These fat

> tails take the form of dead young men these days.

> the accceptable output of a risk model that has

> accepted a certain level of fatality as part of

> the cost cutting. the UKG has accepted this level

> of slaughter as part of its never ending austerity

> programme. these dead young men are the direct

> result of cold number crunching.


But the government denies there being any links whatsoever between for instance benefit cuts and suicides (which to most people would seem a sensible link) - so either they know they are using statistical methods and lying or they don't know what they're doing.


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/may/13/suicides-of-benefit-claimants-reveal-dwp-flaws-says-inquiry

I was waiting at the lights on my bike on the OKR, next to the taped off area. While i was there (a minute or so) two people separately ducked under the tape and walked across the crime scene; despite the presence of a SOCO in white overalls doing the necessary. The two police on guard went ape and took their names; despite protests from both that they'd done nothing wrong.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course no government will admit it's policies

> kill people - would be political suicide..


of course, but it is all about what is politically tolerable. As much as the headline grabbing incidents are bad news for all involved, it does - rightly or wrongly - lead to the question about how communities( and their members) are ranked and the loading involved in making these economic decisions- if people were being shanked and shot on a daily basis in Chelsea, the situation & outcomes would likely be far different

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi All, Looking for recommendations in the following professions. Ideally based locally. -Psychiatrist -Psychologist  -Therapist (EMDR) -Child Psychiatrist ADHD and ASD exp - ideal Any information would be appriciated. C
    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...